Basingstoke & Dean Borough Council Standards Committee Meeting

Apologies were received from J Slimin

Apologies were received from C Proctor

Apologies were received from Amanda Orchard

Apologies were received from L Fryer

Councillor McKay was replaced by Councillor Hussy

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no urgent items.

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 November 2021 were confirmed by the committee as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Monitoring Officer introduced the report which updated the committee on progress in determining Code of Conduct complaints received against borough, parish and town councillors.

It was confirmed that there had been seven new complaints received since the November meeting.

Resolved:     the Committeenotes the report.

The committee received the annual report which summarised the main areas of work of the committee over the past year and reported upon the annual number of complaints received and the determination or dismissal of the complaints.

The report also detailed the committee’s consideration of Local Government Association’s new Model Code of Conduct; social media guidance for councillors, and the recruitment of a new Independent Person and new Independent Standards Assessor.

The committee discussed the report and asked that the following amendments be made in the published annual report:

• Express the committees thanks to Chris Evans.

• The term Councillor be used throughout the document to ensure that it is consistent.

Resolved:     the Committee

·         Approve the Annual Report for publication in the form appended in appendix 1

·         Recommend its presentation to Council for consideration

The Monitoring Officer introduced thereport which outlined issues to be considered in the review of the Arrangements for dealing with Complaints against Councillors (“the Arrangements”) and provided a draft new process for consideration and referral to the Constitution Working Group.

The Local Government Association (LGA) published in September 2021 useful guidance on handling of complaints against members. It was entitled Guidance on Member Model Code of Conduct Complaints Handling (“the Complaints Guidance”). That review had taken account of this guidance.

The Monitoring Officer referred to the comments made by the Independent Persons on the proposed revision that were sent out to the committee prior to the meeting for their consideration.

The Monitoring Officer advised the proposed main changes as follows:

• Proposed to reduce the current 3 stage process to 2, so that the first and second stage of the current arrangements are combined to form the new first stage initial assessment.  That would enable a clearer process to establish whether the criteria at 4.5 were met to justify the complaint and if so whether the complaint should be investigated.  Most cases should be able to be resolved informally.

·         The revised Arrangements had been updated so it was clear that decisions were made by Monitoring Officer/Deputy Monitoring Officer as the person with delegated authority with advice from the Independent Standards Assessor (ISA) or I Independent Person (IP) as appropriate.

·         Other than a decision of a Hearing Panel it was proposed that for fairness the outcome of other decisions made by the MO/DMO are by way of a summary of the complaint and published on the council’s website without identifying information unless there has been a breach found.

·         There was no right of appeal for the complainant or subject member against a decision of the Monitoring Officer, the Standards Committee or the Hearing Panel at any stage of this process.   If the complainant believed that the authority had failed to deal with the complaint properly, they might wish to make a complaint to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

·         The Hearing Panel would be a sub-committee of the Standards Committee composed of three Borough Councillors [should there be parish/town council representation if appropriate and/or independent element – only the Borough Councillors have voting rights].

The Committee discussed the report and made the following comments:

·           Concern was expressed that if a complaint was made to the Ombudsman their remit would be to establish whether the process had been dealt with properly and would not review the outcome of the decision.

·           It was felt that the names of the person identified in the complaint regardless of the outcome should be published on the website in case there was a history of complaints against them.  That would also give the public information which could be relevant when voting for elected Council Members or Parish/Town Councillors.

·           As the information of the person who had a complaint made against them would be retained by the Monitoring Officer.  Those process was considered sufficient and could be referred to when dealing further complaints against the same individual.

·           Concern was raised that by publishing all the names on the website regardless of the outcome it could have a detrimental impact both personally and professionally especially if that person had been targeted due to a vendetta.

·           The issue was to whether publishing all names was fair to everyone or should it just be the people who had been found to have breached the code of conduct.

·           Every complaint made should be investigated fully and only the people that had breached the code of conduct should have their names published.

·           Suggested that statistical information be provided to advise at what level complaints were dismissed and historical data of repeated harassment complaints.

·           Concern that by publishing names regardless of the outcome it could affect people wanting to become a Parish Councillor due to damage to an individual’s reputation.

·           Ability to deal with complaints in an informal way at an early stage due to minor errors would be more beneficial for a Parish Councillor.  It was also suggested that the provision of education to that individual would be of great value.

·           It was requested that all Parish Councillors should be offered training on the Code of Conduct.

·           In conclusion the Committee agreed with the change that unless a breach was found the individual’s name would not be published on the council’s website.

·           Agreed with the reduction of the 3 stage process to a 2 stage process to expedite the procedure.

·         Agreed with the no right of appeal for the complainant or subject member against a decision at any stage of the process.   If the complainant believed that the authority has failed to deal with the complaint properly, they could contact the Ombudsman.

Resolved:     the Committee

·         Provide its views on the proposed changes to the Arrangements for dealing with complaints against Councillors as set out in the appendices.

·         Subject to amendments recommended by the Committee, to refer the amended version of the Arrangements to the Constitution Working Group to consider as part of the constitutional review

The committee reviewed and agreed its work programme with the following comments:-

·         Training to be provided to Parish/Town Councillors on the Code of Conduct.  The method of training to be established but potentially by an e-learning module.   An update on the Code of Conduct Training to be given at the July Committee Meeting.

·         The LGA training pack to be circulated to all Members of the Committee.

District Association appoints their representatives in June for a year, but as selection at the Borough Council happens in May, a month earlier, those representatives are not appointed by BDBC Council until the following May. It would be helpful to review the current appointment process. 

The meeting ended at 7.45 pm.

Chair